More Photo Shop shinanigans

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Oct 26, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    CNN:

    The magic of Photoshop

    A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    Pelosi were arm-in-arm.
     
    RichA, Oct 26, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 10/26/2010 11:30 AM, RichA wrote:
    > CNN:
    >
    > The magic of Photoshop
    >
    > A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    > Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    > campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    > people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    > Pelosi were arm-in-arm.


    You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.

    --
    Peter
     
    peter, Oct 26, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    Twibil Guest

    On Oct 26, 9:19 am, peter <> wrote:
    >
    >
    > > A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    > > Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    > > campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    > > people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    > > Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >
    > You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.


    Of course. But Americans have become so accustomed to being lied to
    in political ads that most of us -the sane ones at least-
    automatically discount most of that crap.

    However. Faked pictures with a political slant are a different kettle
    of fish, as they appeal to our subliminal tendency to accept what we
    see as being real.

    Words, whether spoken or written, are one step away from reality, as
    they must be translated by our brains before they have meaning.

    Pictures, however, go straight to our gut; as any good photographer
    already knows.

    ~Pete
     
    Twibil, Oct 26, 2010
    #3
  4. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 10/26/2010 1:02 PM, Twibil wrote:
    > On Oct 26, 9:19 am, peter<> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >>
    >> You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.

    >
    > Of course. But Americans have become so accustomed to being lied to
    > in political ads that most of us -the sane ones at least-
    > automatically discount most of that crap.
    >
    > However. Faked pictures with a political slant are a different kettle
    > of fish, as they appeal to our subliminal tendency to accept what we
    > see as being real.
    >
    > Words, whether spoken or written, are one step away from reality, as
    > they must be translated by our brains before they have meaning.
    >
    > Pictures, however, go straight to our gut; as any good photographer
    > already knows.


    Agreed. The real point is:

    Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a fraud.
    Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid of fraud, it
    should be automatically become deactivated.


    --
    Peter
     
    peter, Oct 26, 2010
    #4
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Oct 26, 4:55 pm, peter <> wrote:
    > On 10/26/2010 1:02 PM, Twibil wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Oct 26, 9:19 am, peter<>  wrote:

    >
    > >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    > >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    > >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    > >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    > >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >
    > >> You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.

    >
    > > Of course.  But Americans have become so accustomed to being lied to
    > > in political ads that most of us -the sane ones at least-
    > > automatically discount most of that crap.

    >
    > > However. Faked pictures with a political slant are a different kettle
    > > of fish, as they appeal to our subliminal tendency to accept what we
    > > see as being real.

    >
    > > Words, whether spoken or written, are one step away from reality, as
    > > they must be translated by our brains before they have meaning.

    >
    > > Pictures, however, go straight to our gut; as any good photographer
    > > already knows.

    >
    > Agreed. The real point is:
    >
    > Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a fraud.
    > Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid of fraud, it
    > should be automatically become deactivated.
    >
    > --
    > Peter


    Adobe was supposed to have purchased the rights to a software that
    could determine when photos had been manipulated. I remember the
    story from a year ago. Never heard another thing about it.
     
    RichA, Oct 26, 2010
    #5
  6. RichA

    charles Guest

    On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:30:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    wrote:

    >CNN:
    >
    >The magic of Photoshop
    >
    >A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >Pelosi were arm-in-arm.



    It's an ad, especially a political one. Who would believe anything
    they saw there? Or even pay that much attention?
     
    charles, Oct 26, 2010
    #6
  7. On 10/26/10 PDT 4:42 PM, Troy Piggins wrote:
    > * RichA wrote :
    >> CNN:
    >>
    >> The magic of Photoshop
    >>
    >> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >
    > Whoah, whoah, whoah. Hang on. Are you saying that they're using
    > under-handed, devious tactics in an election campaign? Surely
    > not. They'll be making promises and not delivering on them next.


    Crikey, mate, d'ya realize we have a troll post by a Canadian, and a f-u
    by a Strine, all on 'Merican politix?? What's next??

    --
    "Andre, a simple peasant, had only one thing on his mind as he crept
    along the East wall: 'Andre creep ... Andre creep ... Andre creep'."
     
    John McWilliams, Oct 27, 2010
    #7
  8. On 10/26/10 PDT 5:32 PM, Troy Piggins wrote:
    > * John McWilliams wrote :
    >> On 10/26/10 PDT 4:42 PM, Troy Piggins wrote:
    >> [---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 9 lines snipped |=---]
    >>>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.
    >>>
    >>> Whoah, whoah, whoah. Hang on. Are you saying that they're using
    >>> under-handed, devious tactics in an election campaign? Surely
    >>> not. They'll be making promises and not delivering on them next.

    >>
    >> Crikey, mate, d'ya realize we have a troll post by a Canadian, and a f-u
    >> by a Strine, all on 'Merican politix?? What's next??

    >
    > "Strine" - wow. Long time since I've heard that word. Never
    > gets used here and am surprised it's come up. :)
    >
    > I'm sad to report that Australian political campaigns are not that
    > different to the States, even considering the vastly differing
    > election processes and governmental systems.
    >


    Call me Mr. Arcania. .... I haven't been down under for 25 years, and
    all I can hope is that it's not derogatory in anyway.

    Yes, I am aware that no country is exempt from that sort of dreck....

    john
     
    John McWilliams, Oct 27, 2010
    #8
  9. RichA

    TJ Hooker Guest

    "Troy Piggins" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >* RichA wrote :
    >> CNN:
    >>
    >> The magic of Photoshop
    >>
    >> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >
    > Whoah, whoah, whoah. Hang on. Are you saying that they're using
    > under-handed, devious tactics in an election campaign? Surely
    > not. They'll be making promises and not delivering on them next.
    >
    > --
    > Troy Piggins




    LOL, along with "Game Theory", charactor assassination, etc.

    I likes politics i does. Not!!!
     
    TJ Hooker, Oct 27, 2010
    #9
  10. RichA

    TJ Hooker Guest

    "TJ Hooker" <> wrote in message
    news:ia7vgi$cie$...
    > "Troy Piggins" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>* RichA wrote :
    >>> CNN:
    >>>
    >>> The magic of Photoshop
    >>>
    >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >>
    >> Whoah, whoah, whoah. Hang on. Are you saying that they're using
    >> under-handed, devious tactics in an election campaign? Surely
    >> not. They'll be making promises and not delivering on them next.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Troy Piggins

    >
    >
    >
    > LOL, along with "Game Theory", charactor assassination, etc.
    >
    > I likes politics i does. Not!!!



    Goes to show how boring the photographic world had become when we resort to
    politics.
     
    TJ Hooker, Oct 27, 2010
    #10
  11. RichA

    charles Guest

    On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:21:53 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    wrote:

    >On Oct 26, 4:55 pm, peter <> wrote:
    >> On 10/26/2010 1:02 PM, Twibil wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Oct 26, 9:19 am, peter<>  wrote:

    >>
    >> >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >> >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >> >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >> >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >> >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >>
    >> >> You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.

    >>
    >> > Of course.  But Americans have become so accustomed to being lied to
    >> > in political ads that most of us -the sane ones at least-
    >> > automatically discount most of that crap.

    >>
    >> > However. Faked pictures with a political slant are a different kettle
    >> > of fish, as they appeal to our subliminal tendency to accept what we
    >> > see as being real.

    >>
    >> > Words, whether spoken or written, are one step away from reality, as
    >> > they must be translated by our brains before they have meaning.

    >>
    >> > Pictures, however, go straight to our gut; as any good photographer
    >> > already knows.

    >>
    >> Agreed. The real point is:
    >>
    >> Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a fraud.
    >> Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid of fraud, it
    >> should be automatically become deactivated.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    >Adobe was supposed to have purchased the rights to a software that
    >could determine when photos had been manipulated. I remember the
    >story from a year ago. Never heard another thing about it.



    They're probably reverse engineering it so they can slip PS editing
    past it.
     
    charles, Oct 27, 2010
    #11
  12. "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > CNN:
    >
    > The magic of Photoshop
    >
    > A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    > Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    > campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    > people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    > Pelosi were arm-in-arm.


    I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
     
    Pete Stavrakoglou, Oct 27, 2010
    #12
  13. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 10/27/2010 8:11 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    > "RichA"<> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> CNN:
    >>
    >> The magic of Photoshop
    >>
    >> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >
    > I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
    >
    >


    Why? Exactly what is wrong with open communication. I am not embarrassed
    to say I have had some interesting conversations with both Harry Reid
    and Barbara Bush. Maybe if you met Nancy Pelosi, you might at least
    understand her POV, even if you don't agree with it.
    Don't believe the BS put out by those with agendas.
    Right now I would be more concerned about some of the populist
    candidates and their goon squads. Reminds e of events in another country
    in the 30s.

    --
    Peter
     
    peter, Oct 27, 2010
    #13
  14. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:26:55 -0400, peter
    <> wrote:

    >On 10/27/2010 8:11 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    >> "RichA"<> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> CNN:
    >>>
    >>> The magic of Photoshop
    >>>
    >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >>
    >> I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Why? Exactly what is wrong with open communication. I am not embarrassed
    >to say I have had some interesting conversations with both Harry Reid
    >and Barbara Bush. Maybe if you met Nancy Pelosi, you might at least
    >understand her POV, even if you don't agree with it.
    >Don't believe the BS put out by those with agendas.
    >Right now I would be more concerned about some of the populist
    >candidates and their goon squads. Reminds e of events in another country
    >in the 30s.


    We're living in the age of Holocaust deniers. It's not surprising
    other lessons are being forgotten as well.
     
    John A., Oct 27, 2010
    #14
  15. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 10/27/2010 12:23 PM, John A. wrote:
    > On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:26:55 -0400, peter
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 10/27/2010 8:11 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    >>> "RichA"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> CNN:
    >>>>
    >>>> The magic of Photoshop
    >>>>
    >>>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >>>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.
    >>>
    >>> I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Why? Exactly what is wrong with open communication. I am not embarrassed
    >> to say I have had some interesting conversations with both Harry Reid
    >> and Barbara Bush. Maybe if you met Nancy Pelosi, you might at least
    >> understand her POV, even if you don't agree with it.
    >> Don't believe the BS put out by those with agendas.
    >> Right now I would be more concerned about some of the populist
    >> candidates and their goon squads. Reminds e of events in another country
    >> in the 30s.

    >
    > We're living in the age of Holocaust deniers. It's not surprising
    > other lessons are being forgotten as well.


    Sadly true, forgotten or ignored.

    --
    Peter
     
    peter, Oct 27, 2010
    #15
  16. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:59:17 -0500, Rich <> wrote:

    >peter <> wrote in
    >news:4cc81aab$0$5539$-secrets.com:
    >
    >> On 10/27/2010 8:11 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    >>> "RichA"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:
    >>> ...
    >>>> CNN:
    >>>>
    >>>> The magic of Photoshop
    >>>>
    >>>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer,
    >>>> D- Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.
    >>>
    >>> I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Why? Exactly what is wrong with open communication. I am not
    >> embarrassed to say I have had some interesting conversations with both
    >> Harry Reid and Barbara Bush. Maybe if you met Nancy Pelosi, you might
    >> at least understand her POV

    >
    >She has a 21% approval rating. FEW share her POV and she's outspoken
    >enough for most to understand it.


    And a 30+ disapproval rating. So most don't disapprove.

    Statistics are fun!
     
    John A., Oct 28, 2010
    #16
  17. charles <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:21:53 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    >>On Oct 26, 4:55 pm, peter <> wrote:


    >>> Agreed. The real point is:


    >>> Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a fraud.


    If banks are at fault for almost any crime, since their main
    product, money, is being used in aid of almost and crime ...

    >>> Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid of fraud, it
    >>> should be automatically become deactivated.


    So you make a photoshopped whatever mocking something dear
    to anyone who can pressure Adobe, then you get your product
    deactivated. Clever move. How about removing the larnyx and
    all fingers because they are used in almost any crime, too?

    >>Adobe was supposed to have purchased the rights to a software that
    >>could determine when photos had been manipulated. I remember the
    >>story from a year ago. Never heard another thing about it.


    > They're probably reverse engineering it so they can slip PS editing
    > past it.


    Sure. Next stage, the tool will detect anyone displayed as
    politican (real or actor) as a fake, unless it's an Adobe manager.

    Then, soon enough, Adobe owns the world.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Oct 28, 2010
    #17
  18. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 08:34:59 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >On 26 Oct, 21:55, peter <> wrote:
    >> On 10/26/2010 1:02 PM, Twibil wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Oct 26, 9:19 am, peter<>  wrote:

    >>
    >> >>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer, D-
    >> >>> Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >> >>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >> >>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >> >>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.

    >>
    >> >> You don't need PhotoShop to tell a lie. Think swift boat.

    >>
    >> > Of course.  But Americans have become so accustomed to being lied to
    >> > in political ads that most of us -the sane ones at least-
    >> > automatically discount most of that crap.

    >>
    >> > However. Faked pictures with a political slant are a different kettle
    >> > of fish, as they appeal to our subliminal tendency to accept what we
    >> > see as being real.

    >>
    >> > Words, whether spoken or written, are one step away from reality, as
    >> > they must be translated by our brains before they have meaning.

    >>
    >> > Pictures, however, go straight to our gut; as any good photographer
    >> > already knows.

    >>
    >> Agreed. The real point is:
    >>
    >> Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a fraud.
    >> Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid of fraud, it
    >> should be automatically become deactivated.

    >
    >Actually that already happens.
    >I brought an epson perfection V600 scanner and I wanted to try it at
    >it's highest res.
    >The only thing I had easily to hand was a £20 note on scanning it in I
    >was informed
    >that it it was a bank note and that I wouldn't be able to print it as
    >it had been detected and
    >I was directed to a website that warned me about such things as fraud/
    >copying bank notes.
    >
    >I then tried it on a 1p piece, that wasn't detected.


    As I understand it color printers have for years included a yellow dot
    code on every print identifying the printer by serial number. Makes
    counterfeits more traceable.
     
    John A., Oct 29, 2010
    #18
  19. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 10/27/2010 10:59 PM, Rich wrote:
    > peter<> wrote in
    > news:4cc81aab$0$5539$-secrets.com:
    >
    >> On 10/27/2010 8:11 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    >>> "RichA"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:
    >>> ...
    >>>> CNN:
    >>>>
    >>>> The magic of Photoshop
    >>>>
    >>>> A new television ad is under fire for a photo of Rep. Mark Schauer,
    >>>> D- Michigan, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The problem? Schauer's
    >>>> campaign says his rival, Republican Tim Walberg, Photoshopped two
    >>>> people out of the photo making it appear as though the Democrat and
    >>>> Pelosi were arm-in-arm.
    >>>
    >>> I'd be upset too if I was caught standing next to nancy Pelosi.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Why? Exactly what is wrong with open communication. I am not
    >> embarrassed to say I have had some interesting conversations with both
    >> Harry Reid and Barbara Bush. Maybe if you met Nancy Pelosi, you might
    >> at least understand her POV

    >
    > She has a 21% approval rating. FEW share her POV and she's outspoken
    > enough for most to understand it.


    So now you're a political expert. You know less about our politics, than
    you know about business or marketing.

    --
    Peter
     
    peter, Oct 29, 2010
    #19
  20. RichA

    John Turco Guest

    Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >
    > charles <> wrote:
    > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:21:53 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    > >>On Oct 26, 4:55Â pm, peter <> wrote:

    >
    > >>> Agreed. The real point is:

    >
    > >>> Is it Adobe's fault if their product is used in aid of a
    > >>> fraud.

    >
    > If banks are at fault for almost any crime, since their main
    > product, money, is being used in aid of almost and crime ...
    >
    > >>> Is the OP advocating that if used for manipulation, in aid
    > >>> of fraud, it should be automatically become deactivated.

    >
    > So you make a photoshopped whatever mocking something dear
    > to anyone who can pressure Adobe, then you get your product
    > deactivated. Clever move. How about removing the larnyx and
    > all fingers because they are used in almost any crime, too?
    >
    > >> Adobe was supposed to have purchased the rights to a software
    > >> that could determine when photos had been manipulated. I
    > >> remember the story from a year ago. Never heard another
    > >> thing about it.

    >
    > > They're probably reverse engineering it so they can slip PS
    > > editing past it.

    >
    > Sure. Next stage, the tool will detect anyone displayed as
    > politican (real or actor) as a fake, unless it's an Adobe m
    > anager.
    >
    > Then, soon enough, Adobe owns the world.
    >
    > -Wolfgang



    Utter nonsense! Microsoft already "owns the world"...and Adobe
    is a mere piker, by comparison.

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
     
    John Turco, Oct 31, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bruce

    Adobe Photo Elements vs. Photo Shop

    Bruce, Jul 26, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,721
    Abrasha
    Jul 28, 2003
  2. Robertwgross

    Re: Corel Photo-Paint vs/ Adobe Photo Shop

    Robertwgross, Sep 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    516
    Robertwgross
    Sep 12, 2003
  3. Bill Hilton

    Re: Corel Photo-Paint vs/ Adobe Photo Shop

    Bill Hilton, Sep 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,253
    Bill Hilton
    Sep 13, 2003
  4. VT

    Re: Corel Photo-Paint vs/ Adobe Photo Shop

    VT, Sep 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    4,376
    Sexy Susan
    Sep 21, 2003
  5. Glenn Jacobs

    Photo Shop versus Photo Shop Elements

    Glenn Jacobs, Nov 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    574
    Glenn Jacobs
    Nov 14, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page